You've read the hype: "Kubernetes Gateway API is the future of ingress management. It's more flexible, standardized, and powerful than Ingress." Everyone in the community is talking about it.
Then you try to migrate your existing Ingress controllers.
And it breaks. Hard.
Today, let's talk about why most Gateway API migrations fail and what you need to know before you commit to the migration.
The Gateway API Promise vs. Reality
The Gateway API spec looks elegant on paper. It's hierarchical, allows for more flexibility, and separates concerns between infrastructure and application teams. Sounds perfect, right?
But the reality? The tooling is fragmented, provider implementations vary wildly, and your team probably isn't ready for the migration.
Common Failure Points
- Provider Implementation Gaps
Gateway API is just a spec. The real work happens in controller implementations (nginx-gateway, Kong, Istio, etc.). Each provider implements the spec differently and adds their own extensions.
Result: Your config works great with nginx-gateway but breaks with Kong. Or vice versa.
- Lack of RBAC Translation
Your current Ingress setup likely has RBAC rules tied to how roles access ingress objects. Gateway API introduces new resource hierarchy (Gateway → HTTPRoute). Your existing RBAC rules won't map directly.
You'll need to rewrite permissions entirely. This is where teams get stuck.
- Missing Feature Parity
Some advanced Ingress features you're using (request routing based on custom headers, complex load balancing) might not be in the Gateway API spec yet, or might only exist as provider-specific extensions.
You're forced to choose: use extensions (vendor lock-in) or refactor your routing logic.
- No Easy Rollback Strategy
Unlike Ingress (which just defines routes), Gateway API involves managing Gateway resources, Listeners, and Routes as dependencies. If something goes wrong mid-migration, rolling back isn't trivial—you have to carefully unwind the dependencies.
- Team Knowledge Gap
Most DevOps teams have deep Ingress knowledge but zero Gateway API experience. The learning curve is steep, and mistakes in production are expensive.
How to Actually Succeed
Pick Your Provider First: Decide on your Gateway API provider before designing your migration.
Run Parallel Ingress + Gateway API: Deploy both simultaneously. Route new services through Gateway API while keeping old services on Ingress.
Map Your RBAC Upfront: Document exactly how your current Ingress RBAC maps to Gateway API resources.
Build Provider Abstractions: Create an abstraction layer that hides provider-specific extensions.
Plan for Extended Timelines: Budget 2-3 months minimum for planning, testing, and execution.
The Bottom Line
Gateway API is the future. But "future" doesn't mean "ready for you right now." It's not a direct replacement for Ingress—it's a different paradigm. The mistake isn't skipping Gatew
Top comments (0)